Peeps who can't keep a beat

[Scot]

Good thread and a lot of interesting viewpoints on the subject of "talent".

One thing I've noticed is that many folks consider talent an abstract black and white concept as in, "you either got it or you don't". If I had to weigh in on the concept I would say there are varying degrees with no end on either side, i.e. there is nobody with 0% or 100% "talent". I think I get that most in this thread see it at least somewhat that way.

Another thing is the "late-bloomer" factor. Some people pick up an instrument and can almost immediately play and sound good. Others seem to take a while before things click. Just like toddlers learning to speak in that some start turning their babbling vocalizations in to coherent speech quicker than others. Some do the babbling much more than others that seem to listen more to the sounds others make and wait longer before trying it out themselves. I don't think the ones that pick it up quicker necessarily turn out to be better public speakers or hava a higher IQ.

I think the ability to pick things up quickly often gets equated with "talent". I wouldn't say there is no connection but I also wouldn't make any declarations that a kid is gifted or a genius because he can play Bach at a young age. I would note that the kid probably has very ambitious parents with some extra dough to spend.

Someone who has little "talent" is probably not going to be moved to want to learn and play an instrument and, if they do decide to give it a go, will likely not develop the kind of commitment (or obsession) it takes to get to a higher level of playing. They probably turn out to be the ones that have a dream of playing someday with their dusty instruments confined to the closet. Someone who appears to have much talent may or may not become commited enough to get beyond the stage of impressing their friends and family members.

Some of my teachers used to say it like this:

"It's 5% talent and 95% hard work"

Words to live by. I prefer to keep my nose to the grindstone and let others decide who has talent and who doesn't.

 

[tZer]

The programs mentioned earlier in the thread about neuroplasticity and the musician's mind lead me to believe the following:

Ability = being able to do complex things

Talent = being able to do complex things with minimal conscious effort.

Most people can develop the ability to do complex things (like understand and demonstrate musical concepts), some are able to have those abilities become a part of their DNA (for want of a better way to describe 'natural') very readily and are able to demonstrate skill and aptitude with very little apparent conscious effort.

Some have to work harder at it for it to become a part of their DNA and some may not be able to ever have the ability do those things without applying a great deal of conscious effort - and even then may not be able to do those things very well.

1) Some people are born with certain predispositions for things like music and some people are not

2) While both groups can learn abilities and develop talent, the former group may simply take to the process of understanding music more easily (naturally) than the latter.

3) The brain is very malleable in the early years of life and things like music and language develop more readily during that time so people who begin to study such things while the brain is in this developing state tend to end up with a much more natural relationship to those subjects (becomes a part of their their DNA quick and early).

4) For those who tackle music later in life after the brain's 'leaning ripeness' slows, they can still learn these things but it will require much more conscious effort to do what the former group can do without apparent effort.

This is the part I think is very fascinating. The brain is very much like your computer with RAM (volatile memory) being conscious thought and ROM (storage for future access and use) being stuff that has become part of our DNA - like our ability to speak, walk, etc...

Before something is in your DNA, you have to load it into RAM in order to use it. This is processor intensive and requires a lot of resources. So before it's a part of your DNA, it's like a kludgy computer program that doesn't integrate well with your OS.

As you refine your abilities it's as if the programming becomes much less resource intensive - and ultimately can run in the background without demanding a lot of resources or processing power to function well.

Some people may even be born with some of these 'add on' apps (like musical ability) as a part of their original OS...

Some people's OS may simply not have the necessary components or architecture to accept an add on app like musical ability.

So - Nature, nurture? Sure. Both. Can some people learn things like how to keep time? Sure. Do some people pop into existence with such abilities? Possibly... Probably. Are there some people who, no matter how hard they try or how much they want it, never be able to do some things 'naturally' but only by expending a great amount of effort and then only doing so in a mediocre fashion - Obviously.

 

[Big Brother]

Experiences early in life when your mind is essentially blank provide the context that you view everything else subsequently. (In my un-siantifick opinion) Those with experiences that trigger the brain to build connections that make music easier to understand will have a head start and will likely continue to play if they discover music, as people generally like to do things that come 'easy' to them.

But I think that if you miss out on the early imprinting that helps learning certain things later on, you can still pound it out with effort. In most cases.

I taught myself to read and write at 4, it was and still is easy for me. My uncle however was effectively illiterate until high school and as hard as he tried to overcome it, he dropped out of HS out of frustration and never finished a book until he was an adult. Some things just come easier for some than others.

On the other hand, he could draw a perfectly straight line freehand and drew detailed blueprints of houses on cocktail napkins, naturally using concepts that I didn't understand whatsoever until I took architecture courses myself in college. I never came close to his level of understanding despite the work I put in, while he just dabbled in it out of boredom.

I do believe there is something to the 10,000 hour rule however. With that much time invested into something, you can 'rewire' your mind to think a certain way and overcome the imprinting that helps the 'naturals' out there in the beginning.

The naturals tend to be the people we know though because it's far easier for them to start and stay motivated, most people grow frustrated with things that don't come easy and stick to those things that do.

 

[suraci]

I agree with just about everything in these last three posts. And plenty before them.
The 0% all the way to 100% gamut of talent, got me to thinking about a more difficult to explain phenomenon in music performance.
That is the concept of the player being an empty vessel, a conduit through which "the Music" flows through him or her. The idea of us getting out of the way. This is an advanced practice and also the highest expression of music as a Gift from the Giver of music. I will lose the atheists here, but some of my heroes just happen to have devoted their music to Spirit or God. Bach, Coltrane, John McLaughlin . Even a fellow who doesn't appear to be a " spiritual" person.. ( just a hunch ) Richard Wagner, when asked about his amazing music for ( especially for me, the Opening, the Overture ) Tristan and Isolde, spoke as if it just flowed through his intuition. It took incredible talent 1. to HEAR the music, to write it down, and to later orchestrate it... amazingly talented genius at work.
This is the most wonderful gift, honor, that an artist can experience. Where ego gets out of the way.

 

[tZer]

Factor into the 'faith' element the fact that many things we simply accept or have faith in tend to be as such because we have not explained them in a way that satisfies our need to know.

I am not knocking faith or the faithful here.

What I am saying is that there is something about well executed music that is 'transcendent' - something that goes beyond simply hearing pleasant, organized sounds. Something that causes those experiencing it to 'get more' from it than simple audible info.

Could this be left over from how our brains were designed to work before we had an organized, spoken language? Possibly. There was certainly a time that we were not speaking to each other, yet we were able to form communities and relationships with others. Some theorize that music pre-dates spoken language and it was the ability to be musical and to listen to the 'music' of nature that was critical to our development as social creatures.

Think about it. Primitive man was probably much more 'in sync' with the sounds of nature. Have you listened to a bird lately? Musical, huh? Whales? Almost all animals emit some sonic utterances for all sorts of reasons. It's highly likely that before we (humans) were chit-chatting - we were probably grunting, vocalizing, making and listening to sounds that were more musical than verbal and this was THE way we connected with each other AND the world around us.

Modern man no longer *needs* to be connected to other humans in this way and our need to pay that sort of attention to the sounds of nature (if we can even hear them in our noisy environments) is all but gone. That doesn't mean we don't still have areas in our brain that are designed to receive and interpret those sounds. But we simply don't use it for that purpose anymore. If we want to connect with people, we speak to them.

But think - if we do have areas of our brains that were designed to process music AS a formal language - to process the sounds of nature and imitate them to connect and be connected couldn't it be possible that music hits those areas of our brains and tries to 'take us' places that we simply don't go anymore?

 

[Big Brother]

Factor into the 'faith' element the fact that many things we simply accept or have faith in tend to be as such because we have not explained them in a way that satisfies our need to know.

I am not knocking faith or the faithful here.

What I am saying is that there is something about well executed music that is 'transcendent' - something that goes beyond simply hearing pleasant, organized sounds. Something that causes those experiencing it to 'get more' from it than simple audible info.

Could this be left over from how our brains were designed to work before we had an organized, spoken language? Possibly. There was certainly a time that we were not speaking to each other, yet we were able to form communities and relationships with others. Some theorize that music pre-dates spoken language and it was the ability to be musical and to listen to the 'music' of nature that was critical to our development as social creatures.

Think about it. Primitive man was probably much more 'in sync' with the sounds of nature. Have you listened to a bird lately? Musical, huh? Whales? Almost all animals emit some sonic utterances for all sorts of reasons. It's highly likely that before we (humans) were chit-chatting - we were probably grunting, vocalizing, making and listening to sounds that were more musical than verbal and this was THE way we connected with each other AND the world around us.

Modern man no longer *needs* to be connected to other humans in this way and our need to pay that sort of attention to the sounds of nature (if we can even hear them in our noisy environments) is all but gone. That doesn't mean we don't still have areas in our brain that are designed to receive and interpret those sounds. But we simply don't use it for that purpose anymore. If we want to connect with people, we speak to them.

But think - if we do have areas of our brains that were designed to process music AS a formal language - to process the sounds of nature and imitate them to connect and be connected couldn't it be possible that music hits those areas of our brains and tries to 'take us' places that we simply don't go anymore?

I've heard it said that music is how we originally passed down our knowledge to later generations. How easily we remember music as opposed to 'fact' and that we still rely on mnemonic devices to remember information supports that contention.

I can recite all the states in alphabetical order because they taught us that song in 5th grade. Get this... "Albania, Albania, you border on the Adriatic..." From a Cheers episode 25 years ago.

I can easily remember the lyrics to songs that I haven't heard in decades, but can't remember the phone number I dialed 30 minutes ago.

I seriously believe there is something to that theory, and that our otherwise odd fascination with music is derived from that.

 

[tZer]

To extend the idea that "music is transcendent", an anecdote from my real life experience with music and seeing it have a very real impact on people.

It was over a decade ago when I did some volunteer work for S.L.A.R.C. working with kids and young adults with behavioral and mental conditions ranging from hyperactivity to sever mental retardation to autism and so on.

This was a weekend long cabin camping experience every two weeks - all year long - to provide respite for the parents of our campers. Throughout the day we counselors were paired with campers and took them through all sorts of fun and developmental activities individually and in very small groups.

At the end of the day on Saturday we would get all campers together in the main meeting hall/gym for a big group activity. Seems like a typical camp thing, right? Well...

People with autism process the world very differently than do people with other forms of mental disability. People with certain behavioral disorders behave quite differently than people with other forms of behavioral disorders - and so on. What works well as an attention getting, participatory activity for one group may fail miserably on another (and usually did) resulting in essentially an hour or so of mildly controlled chaos.

These activities were usually things like parachute games or basket ball or tag or... you name it... Duck, duck, goose... you get the idea. The point being to get them all to interact as a group.

I offered to bring my band up one Saturday night and do an unplugged concert as the 'all inclusive activity' and the person in charge thought it would be OK so I talked to my band - let them know that they were about to play a show for a crowd like they've never seen before and tried to prepare them for the chaos that usually surrounded this event.

The band showed up, I ushered them into the gym where we set up a few folding chairs, a three-piece kit, small amps and a tiny vocal PA and waited for the group to arrive.

When they arrived it was the typical escalation of din. Sounds getting louder and stranger as over 30 campers and 10 counselors filed in. Chaos, din, clamor, shriek, growl, howl... Then the first chord of the first song...

Silence. The entire room - even the girl who was misdiagnosed as MR who was actually deaf - everyone was instantly interested and silent.

We played song after song after song and the joy and excitement on everyone's face was obvious! Not a single camper had an 'episode' and ALL campers and counselors obviously enjoyed this shared experience.

I was convinced beyond any doubt after that event that music indeed transcends where other things fall short. I cannot emphasize enough how difficult it was to have this many people of varying mental and behavioral conditions in one space, attentive and turned on by a single activity - and enjoying themselves - obviously and genuinely happy. We're talking some kids who spent most of the time curled up in the fetal position rocking and moaning...

No exaggeration - no BS. I'd be willing to bet you would get the same results repeatedly. To me, this says that music speaks to another part of the brain - one that isn't necessarily impacted by the disorders that afflict most people. That even if you are severely mentally handicapped, you can appreciate and enjoy - and be transformed by music just as easily as a person with a typically functioning brain.

 

[shadow_FIX]

Sometimes there IS some innate talent, but you can't rely on that alone to get you anywhere in music. Some people are gifted in music, others in athletics, poetry, math, problem solving, motivational speaking...everyone has a niche. This is not to say that you can't excel at something outside of this "niche"...in fact with time and practice you can make anything assimilate into your "niche".

I have taught people that have an innate "knack" for music, and others that struggle with it. In the end I was able to teach the strugglers what they needed to know to understand the basics of music...it just took a little more time and a few more tries.

Personally, I cheat in music with perfect pitch, but it's not all hunky dory all the time. I actually ran into an issue with it a few times so far. Using the transpose key on an electric piano to accomodate vocalists = no go. We were singing a medieval piece in my Music History I class, and the director used period-specific intonation: they used to tune to A415 or something instead of 440. This systematically undermined my foundation of hearing pitches and singing in tune, and it was brutal for me. Others around me had no problem with it haha.

 

[NorCal Dog]

When I was a kid we called it tone deaf, but I'm pretty sure that's not the proper terminology. I'm curious about people who can't keep a beat, clap in time with a song, or identify the 1 beat in a 4 beat count accurately... you know, the ones that look really stupid and funny dancing.

Can they be taught rhythem? Has there been any research done on this? Is it pointless to try and teach music to someone who can't tap their foot?

If so, should a student simply be told from day one, "Music isn't your thing, you'd be better off persuing something else," if they're challenged in such a way? Or is it just a handicap that can be overcome in time?

hey if this white boy can figure it out, i think anybody can

 

[nutdog]

I've heard it said that music is how we originally passed down our knowledge to later generations. How easily we remember music as opposed to 'fact' and that we still rely on mnemonic devices to remember information supports that contention.

I can recite all the states in alphabetical order because they taught us that song in 5th grade. Get this... "Albania, Albania, you border on the Adriatic..." From a Cheers episode 25 years ago.

I can easily remember the lyrics to songs that I haven't heard in decades, but can't remember the phone number I dialed 30 minutes ago.

I seriously believe there is something to that theory, and that our otherwise odd fascination with music is derived from that.

I can still sing the preamble to the constitution because of schoolhouse rock. Don't get me started on Conjunction Junction.

I am fascinated with the power of music. It is simple and stupid yet complex and intelligent, cheap and expensive. It can make people happy, sad, angry, hyper, calm or create about any emotional reaction. It can make stoic people stand up and move in hysterical fashion. It can bring back forgotten memories. It can peel panties.

About 15 or so years ago I was riding in the car and a song I didn't like came on the radio and I found myself singing along. I knew all the words to a song I didn't like. I know the lyrics to thousands of songs. It made realize what the mind is capable of storing and that I needed to be more careful about what I put in it.

To extend the idea that "music is transcendent", an anecdote from my real life experience with music and seeing it have a very real impact on people.

Cool story. There's a girl in our church that was severely neglected as an infant. Virtually left in the crib with no attention. She has many severe physical and mental problems. She can't talk and can barely walk. I'm Presbyterian, also known as the frozen chosen, so when we play cool songs in church no one knows how to react. It's funny when an obviously moving tune ends and it's dead quiet but everyone knows they should say something. Occasionally a murmured amen is acceptable. But little Lilah will stand and clap. It's great. She just does what's natural. (or is it learned?)

 

[tZer]

But little Lilah will stand and clap. It's great. She just does what's natural. (or is it learned?)

That's really it, isn't it? Music gets through on a whole other, more universal level.

 

[suraci]

A mostly forgotten or trivialized giant of jazz, called 'music the universal language'... over a half a century ago; his name, Louis Armstrong.
I cannot recall a terrific anecdote like the one with a room filled with various mentally or emotionally challenged people, hearing music.. as one.
But I know this has happened to me, at one point or another, to one degree or another over my long career as a musician.
That speaks to the power of this thing we call music. I think it is not just brain, but soul.. I suppose that doesn't matter.. the semantics, or metaphysics.. but what I am referring to in my earlier post was the rare times this transformative transcendent experience happens essentially ONLY in the mind of the composer or player.
When Wagner created his Tristan score, he was presumably in a solitary situation. The music comes to the composer from within, it is not visible nor audible to anyone who might be " a fly on the wall " so to speak.
This is yet another form of "amazingness" of music.